Posts Tagged ‘Rumsfeld’

 

The Banality of Imperial War Criminals

Joe Giambrone

FREE ONLINE

posterMaxi-10-9-e1527794549420

“Not only will America go to your country and kill all your people, but what’s worse I think is they’ll come back twenty years later and make a movie about how killing your people made their soldiers feel sad.”
–Frankie Boyle

This film may have been the one that inspired Frankie’s rant.

As the next team of warmongers gears up to lie the world into an illegal assault on Iran, this film takes on added significance. It’s angering on so many levels from the monsters in suits, to the reign of terror, to the Nazi-level war crimes, to the willful blindness of both participants and filmmakers.

Some Background

America’s invasion of Iraq was exactly comparable to Nazi Germany’s invasion of Poland, from a legal standpoint. No American ever had the legal right to step one foot on Iraqi soil. Iraq was a sovereign country, a principle that World War Two was fought to establish, costing upwards of 70 million lives.

America thinks it’s above the law and has led the assault on any restraints to its exercise of force, Iraq being a most glaring example.

No End In Sight says not one word about any of that. Far from it. They accept the US regime’s main argument that Saddam was a bad guy, and so somehow it was okay to invade his country. It was not.

1717-colin-powell-un-vial-020503

They knew it was not. That’s why they concocted phony “Weapons of Mass Destruction” lies to try and deceive the United Nations into granting Security Council approval for the attack–and their obvious lies failed. That made the entire war a breach of the UN Charter and the “Supreme International Crime,” Crimes Against the Peace. Every subsequent action was the direct fault of those who initiated the war, every atrocity, every evil, every consequence, every kidnapping, every maiming, every rape, every murder. These people are monsters towering well above and beyond the Saddams or Qaddafis of the world.

By their own logic, as they are immoral and gleefully evil, other nations now have a right to invade America and install a new regime. That’s not the way international law works. It’s the way imperial war propaganda works, however.

Spinning the Indefensible

Now onto the fiasco depicted in the film. We have a cast of self-styled do-gooders participating in a major war crime, desiring to stabilize the country and rebuild it (after their own military destroyed it). They are prevented from doing so by a series of seemingly incomprehensible bad decisions from Rumsfeld, Cheney, Paul Bremer and their gaggle of incompetent lackeys.

1. Upon the fall of Saddam, no law is enforced, allowing complete chaos and looting all over the country.

2. The Iraqi army is disbanded leaving hundreds of thousands of armed, trained men, with no income and nothing to do.

3. The Americans refuse to even speak with Iraqis as their stormtroopers raid and kill and torture their family members.

I’m of the mind that all of this was intentional, and that the PLAN A was never to win the peace in Iraq. Wars are so difficult to launch, they wanted Iraq to descend into region-wide chaos engulfing Syria (done) and Iran (still very much on the agenda).

General Wesley Clark divulged the Bush Junta’s plans, which were to attack “seven nations in five years,” barely a week after they allowed the 9/11 attacks to succeed. That’s another story, and America has yet to recover a modicum of self-respect and demand justice.

What No End in Sight captured was a small part of this large imperial agenda for a “new American Century” of aggression and the seizing of vital resources, particularly oil and gas.

While the film talks about Paul Bremer’s presumed incompetence, it fails to mention his 100 Orders slicing up Iraq’s economy like Darth Vader seizing a new star system. Of course, pillaging other countries is glaringly illegal, but we’ve already established the blinders worn by the filmmakers.

These types of key omissions are why I don’t ever trust US documentarians when it comes to foreign policy. They revert to the juvenile “mistakes were made” mindset. They’re not “mistakes” when you do them on purpose: those are crimes, capital crimes punishable by death. They violate every Treaty the country has signed–and which the US helped create in the first place–including the Geneva Conventions and the UN Charter.

The most evil criminals wear suits and they get away with it. One of the reasons they get away with it is because of biased journalism that spins away their crimes so that the public is dissuaded from thinking of US rulers as criminals on par with the worst war criminals one can name. In the end it’s an assault on reality as well as morality.

 

Twin_Towers-NYC-Treasony

 

November 2003: CNN shilling for Treason.

 

Max Cleland, a “9/11 Investigation Commissioner” calls bullshit on the cover-up.

America is full of willfully ignorant sheeple. That’s just a fact.

Bandar-300x188 (1)“Bandar Bush”

Kevin Ryan:
Saudi Ties to 9/11 Mean U.S. Ties to 9/11
  • When two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, Khalid Al-Mihdhar and Nawaf Al-Hazmi, came to the U.S. in January 2000, they immediately met with Omar Al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi spy and an employee of a Saudi aviation company. Al-Bayoumi, who was the target of FBI investigations in the two years before 9/11, became a good friend to the two 9/11 suspects, setting them up in an apartment and paying their rent.
  • Al-Mihdhar and Al-Hazmi then moved in with a long-time FBI asset, Abdussattar Shaikh, who was said to be a teacher of the Saudi language. Shaikh allowed them to live in his home for at least seven months, later saying that he thought they were only Saudi students. In an unlikely coincidence, both Al-Bayoumi and Shaikh also knew Hani Hanjour, the alleged pilot of Flight 77. Although Shaikh was reported to be a retired professor at San Diego State University, the university had no records of him. He was then said to be a professor at American Commonwealth University but that turned out to be a phony institution. During the 9/11 investigations, the FBI refused to allow Shaikh to be interviewed or deposed. The FBI also tried to prevent the testimony of Shaikh’s FBI handler, which occurred only secretly at a later date. Despite having a very suspicious background, the FBI gave Shaikh $100,000 and closed his contract.
  • Journalist Joseph Trento claimed that an unnamed former CIA officer, who worked in Saudi Arabia, told him that Alhazmi and Almihdhar were Saudi spies protected by U.S. authorities.
  • After being appointed CIA Director in 1997, George Tenet began to cultivate close personal relationships with officials in Saudi Arabia. Tenet grew especially close to Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the United States. Bandar and Tenet often met at Bandar’s home near Washington. Tenet did not share information from those meetings with his own CIA officers who were handling Saudi issues at the agency. These facts are among the reasons to suspect that Tenet facilitated the crimes of 9/11.
  • Bernard Kerik, the New York City police commissioner at the time of 9/11, spent three years working in Saudi Arabia in the 1970s. He then spent another three years in Saudi Arabia in the 1980s as the “chief investigator for the royal family.” It was Kerik who first told the public that explosives were not used at the World Trade Center (WTC) in a news conference. It was also his police department that was said to have discovered a passport that fell from one of the burning towers, providing dubious evidence identifying one of the alleged hijackers.
  • After 9/11, former FBI director Louis Freeh, whose agency failed to stop Al Qaeda-attributed terrorism from 1993 to 2001, became the personal attorney for Tenet’s dubious cohort, Prince Bandar. Sometimes called “Bandar Bush” for his close relationship to the Bush family, Bandar was the Saudi intelligence director from 2005 to 2015.
  • The company that designed the security system for the WTC complex, Kroll Associates, had strong connections to Saudi Arabia. For example, Kroll board member Raymond Mabus, now Secretary of the Navy, was the U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia in the 1990s. Control of WTC security speaks to the question of how explosives could have been placed in the three tall buildings that weredemolished on 9/11.
  • All four of the contractors that were involved in implementing Kroll’s security design for the WTC had done significant business in the Saudi kingdom. Stratesec, the company that installed the overall electronic security system at the WTC complex, had also managed security for Dulles airport, where Flight 77 took off, and for United Airlines, which owned two of the three other planes. For many reasons, the company’s managers should be primary suspects in the crimes of 9/11. Stratesec was in partnership with a large Saudi engineering and construction company to develop and conduct business in Saudi Arabia.
  • Another interesting connection between Stratesec and Saudi Arabia was that, in the years leading up to 9/11, Stratesec held its annual shareholders’ meetings in an office that was leased by Saudi Arabia. This was an office in the Watergate Hotel occupied by the Saudi Embassy (run by Prince Bandar).
  • The Bush and Bin Laden-financed Carlyle Groupowned, through BDM International, the Vinnell Corporation, a mercenary operation that had extensive contracts and trained the Saudi Arabian National Guard. Several of Stratesec’s key employees, including its operating manager Barry McDaniel, came from BDM. In 1995, BDM’s Vinnell was one of the first targets of Al Qaeda, in Saudi Arabia.
  • One of the two major contractors hired to manage the cleanup of debris at Ground Zero—Bovis Lend Lease—had previously built the Riyadh Olympic stadium in Saudi Arabia.
  • The other primary cleanup company at Ground Zero—AMEC Construction—had just completed a $258 million refurbishment of Wedge 1 of the Pentagon, which is exactly where Flight 77 was said to impact that building. AMEC had a significant presence in Saudi Arabia for decades, working for the national oil company, Saudi Aramco.
  • In the 1990s, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), run by Dick Cheney’s protégé Duane Andrews, trained the Saudi Navy and instructed Saudi military personnel at its company headquarters in San Diego. SAIC had a greater impact on counterterrorism programs in the United States than any other non-government entity and it profited greatly from 9/11.
  • While SAIC was training the Saudi Navy, the Carlyle/BDM subsidiary Vinnell Corporation was training the Saudi Arabian National Guard. Simultaneously, Booz Allen Hamilton was managing the Saudi Marine Corps and running the Saudi Armed Forces Staff College.
  • Salomon Smith Barney (SSB), the company that occupied all but ten floors of WTC building 7, was taken over by Citigroup in 1998 after Citigroup was taken over by Saudi Prince Alwaleed, in a deal brokered by The Carlyle Group. Donald Rumsfeldand Dick Cheney joined the advisory board for SSB just after Citigroup’s takeover and they only resigned in January 2001 to join the Bush Administration.
  • The Saudi government was sued by thousands of 9/11 victim’s family members due to the suspicion that Saudi Arabia helped to finance Al Qaeda. The Saudis hired the law firm of Bush Administration insider James Baker to defend them in that lawsuit.
  • The 9/11 families’ lawsuit against Saudi royals was thrown out on a technicality related to the ability to sue a foreign government and, later, the Obama Administration backed the Saudis during the appeal.
  • The world’s leading insurance provider, Lloyd’s of London, filed a lawsuit alleging Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks. Lloyd’s dropped the lawsuit just days later without explanation.
  • After 9/11, it became clear that Saudi officials were supporting terrorism. For example, in the case of a would-be “underwear bomber,” it was revealed that the suspect was working for the CIA and Saudi intelligence.
  • Saudi Prince Bandar has been accused of coordinating an international ring of terrorism in his role as Saudi intelligence chief. From Egypt to Libya, and now in Syria, evidence suggests that Bandar Bush has led a network of terrorists around the globe, with U.S. support.

Two hours of analysis of the September 11th attacks, the debunkers debunked, and a lot of claims.   Some may need further corroboration, but much of the info is good (I’m not vouching for all of it).

 

http://wp.me/pwAWe-2SP

 

AP-Image-Syria-620x413

 

 

Bush+Hosts+Obama+Former+Presidents+White+House+AIYYLtxH7HCl

Bush already found guilty in Malaysian court for war crimes, and he can’t travel to numerous countries now.  Obama is also being investigated for ongoing war crimes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrTeBDetcfw&feature=player_detailpage

America’s unending descent into Naziism and barbarism are somewhat investigated in this Errol Morris documentary. I say somewhat, because the investigation falls flat and is highly limited, constrained primarily to the collection of characters who were prosecuted for taking the pictures of themselves abusing Iraqis.

Notably, not one Iraqi voice is permitted. No human rights lawyer is included. The only people included who are opposed to these atrocities are Army personnel and a private mercenary interrogator from CACI! There’s balance. One can get more “fair and balanced” discussion on Fox News occasionally.

Morris gets statements from General Janis Karpinsky, the figurehead of the US prison system in Iraq, who was quite out of the loop in regard to the torture and systematic “softening up” of prisoners nightly. The fact that it was her job to know what was going on in the facilities under her command never seems to enter the discussion. Her testimony helps establish the Army’s cover-up, however. She does name her superior officers and establish some complicity.

In previous investigations of Karpinsky, Rumsfeld’s torture memo came up (Rumsfeld’s Memo on Interrogation Techniques), but was not included here. The director, Errol Morris, repeatedly drops the ball and fails to connect the dots regarding the command responsibility. He spends so much time giving an open microphone to people like Lynndie England, that the expected hard-hitting investigation of the policies and the policy-makers never happens. Far from establishing the chain of evidence and prosecuting those people for establishing a torture gulag, the case is left mostly to insinuation and hearsay.

Morris ignores the John Yoo and Alberto Gonzales torture memos that expose the Bush White house approving their evasion of the Geneva Conventions. He ignores the use of the term “military necessity” as a condition for abusing prisoners, a clear red flag. He ignores the torture deaths of previous prisoners in Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan, and the extensive investigations that had come before such as General Taguba’s report. Also, the statements of high officials like Dick Cheney in defense of drowning torture. Morris could have also included the widespread torture performed by US client regimes including SAVAK in Iran and the South Vietnamese government, which did much of America’s dirty work thorughout that conflict. Even today, the US insists on sending its victims to known torture states for interrogation, an unlawful program called “rendition” that Barack Obama has not discontinued. America’s close relationships with dictators who use torture is well-documented and irrefutable.

But Morris, in typical liberal apologetic style, opts for a Pollyanna attitude about the entire matter. His claim is that America somehow lost its way and its values, never considering that this way has been the way since anyone can remember; ask a native American. Morris treats Standard Opertaing Procedure as more of a pet art project about the Abu Ghraib photographs themselves, than as a criminal investigation of numerous war crimes.

A clue to the man behind the movie is found in Morris’ director’s commentary, when he asks a jaw-dropping rhetorical question of the audience: “Do the ends of bringing freedom to Iraq justify the means of abandoning America’s core values and principles?”

What universe does this man inhabit?
Continue